driver awareness course

Nick_C

Was he driving in a built up area with street lighting? If he was, he should have known it was a 30 limit.

S 124 of the Highway Code states "The presence of street lights generally means that there is a 30 mph (48 km/h) speed limit unless otherwise specified."

This is why you see "repeater" signs in built up areas where a higher (40) limit applies. If there is street lighting and no indicator that the limit is higher (or lower) than 30, then you must assume it is 30,

If this was a road with street lighting and your son was not aware of the rule, then he needs to go on that speed awareness course.

Aretnap

4743hudsonj wrote: »

When learning your taught that if it isn't a dual carriage way, there are street lamps and there are no repeater roundels indicating otherwise, you should always presume it to be a 30mph limit.

It's doesn't matter whether it's a dual or single carriageway. Street lights* and no repeater signs means a 30 limit, regardless of the type of road (unless it's a motorway).

*Pedantically the street lights have to be less than 185m apart, but nearly all roads with street lights have them closer together than that.

Aretnap

Muscle750 wrote: »

If it wasn't a 250 mile round trip I'd be there tomorrow to see if there are two signs one either side of the road stating 30 mph if there aren't I'm of the belief after speaking to a friend at the highways agency they are on dodgy ground

There should have been 30moh signs wherever he first entered the 30 zone from a different speed limit. That could have been quite some distance further back. Assuming the road(s) after the original sign had street lights no further signs would have been required.

Bennifred

It will really do your son no harm to do the speed awareness course, and may do him a lot of good. It may even save his life, or someone else's.
It will hopefully teach him to respect the law of the land and those who uphold it.

Blackpool_Saver

I found the post very difficult to read it was blurring due to being a wall of text. But, I too think a speed awareness course would be good for a young driver.

facade

As the minimum penalty for speeding is now £100 + 3 points, as the course is still at the lower price, and carries no points (but some insurance companies now ask if you have done a course) I'd take the course.

timbo58

Have to agree with most comments.
The courses are well run, informative and worth going to as (ahem) I did one recently.

Miffed I lost a day off work and travelled over 100 miles to do it (none in my immediate area) but no complaints about the actual course.

Even at my age, clean licence, rural area, insurance group car (smack in the middle of the lowest insurance quotes age range) I will save the £95 in a couple of years of non increased premiums, a young driver would save 2 or 3 times that amount per year on that ratio!

Any insurance company that makes disclosure of a SAC part of their terms would lose my business on principle FWIW -the course is entirely confidential in any case- the only time the courses can disclose is IF you are liable to be offered a course again for speeding within a certain period and then ONLY to the investigating force.

It would breach privacy rights for them to inform insurance companies, and not having my premiums increase was a major deciding factor in taking the course over the 3 points and fine.

What relevance is having taken a SAC to your perceived risk?

It seems to me this is similar to the 'commuting' part of a premium increase -another money making scheme without a basis in risk.

IMHO having recently taken a SAC a driver is less likely to be unaware of speed limits at the very least -perhaps the insurance companies need to make a reduction in premiums?!

Muscle750

I am of the belief that you can do the course at a local area to having to travel back to the area of the offence can someone please clarify this it hardly seems ok if you got caught in say Newcastle yet live in Penzance you got best part of 700 mile round trip etc

4743hudsonj

Muscle750 wrote: »

I am of the belief that you can do the course at a local area to having to travel back to the area of the offence can someone please clarify this it hardly seems ok if you got caught in say Newcastle yet live in Penzance you got best part of 700 mile round trip etc

What is unfair about it? They are offering you an alternative to points and a bigger fine?

It may not be the case you would have to travel back to Newcastle but certainly the nearest base where the same company running Newcastles scheme. The logistics of people swapping course management would be tedious for forces and IMHO not a good use of their already much wasted time.

vaio

4743hudsonj wrote: »

........It may not be the case you would have to travel back to Newcastle but certainly the nearest base where the same company running Newcastles scheme. The logistics of people swapping course management would be tedious for forces and IMHO not a good use of their already much wasted time.

I thought it was a national scheme where, although it might be different firms running the course in different areas, if you need to go on one then you can do it wherever is convenient to you